The NFL is taking away millions of dollars of salary-cap space belonging to the Dallas Cowboys and Washington Redskins for front-loading contracts during the uncapped 2010 season, according to league sources.

The salary cap is projected to be $120.6 million in 2012, but the Cowboys will lose $10 million, while the Redskins will be docked $36 million in cap space, sources said.

Dallas and Washington can split the cap loss over the 2012 and '13 seasons in whatever form they prefer, with $1.6 million each going to 28 other NFL teams, the sources said. The teams receiving money can also choose to split it over the 2012 and '13 seasons however they see fit, sources said.

The New Orleans Saints and Oakland Raiders are the only two teams that will not receive a portion of the money, but will also not lose any of their own cap space, according to sources.

"The Management Council Executive Committee determined that the contract practices of a small number of clubs during the 2010 league year created an unacceptable risk to future competitive balance, particularly in light of the relatively modest salary cap growth projected for the new agreement's early years," the league said in a statement Monday. "To remedy these effects and preserve competitive balance throughout the league, the parties to the CBA agreed to adjustments to team salary for the 2012 and 2013 seasons.

"These agreed-upon adjustments were structured in a manner that will not affect the salary cap or player spending on a league-wide basis."

During the pre-lockout 2010 season, the collective bargaining agreement expired and the league operated without a salary cap.

According to sources, the Cowboys and Redskins took immediate cap hits during the 2010 season that normally would have been spread out over the length of the contracts, giving them an advantage that other NFL owners found unfair.

In September 2010, the Cowboys signed wide receiver Miles Austin to a six-year extension worth $54 million and paid him a $17 million base salary that season.

Also, as part of the original deal, Austin was to receive a base salary of $8.5 million in 2011, but Dallas created cap room before the season by lowering Austin's salary to $685,000 and turning $7.855 million into a signing bonus.

"The Dallas Cowboys were in compliance with all league salary cap rules during the uncapped year," the team said in a statement Monday night. "We look forward to the start of the free agency period where our commitment to improving our team remains unchanged."

The Redskins also denied any wrongdoing, with general manager Bruce Allen issuing a statement protesting the team's innocence.

"Every contract entered into by the club during the applicable periods complied with the 2010 and 2011 collective bargaining agreements and, in fact, were approved by the NFL commissioner's office," the statement said.

With free agency starting Tuesday, Washington is about $40 million under this year's cap. The Redskins saved more than $3 million in cap room Monday when they released cornerback Oshiomogho Atogwe -- one of their big free-agent signings from last year -- and fullback Mike Sellers.

Dallas is about $5 million under the cap.

So Washington has 16 players who could leave, plus tight end Fred Davis, who received the franchise tag and would bring two No. 1 draft picks if he signs elsewhere.

Dallas has 15 free agents, including quarterback Jon Kitna, who has announced his retirement.

The league took an abnormally long time to release the 2012 cap number, due in part to the fact that the league was trying to decide how to handle the issues, the sources said.

According to the sources, the deductions are not termed as violations, but are part of a recent agreement the NFL and the players' association made to raise the salary cap number while preserving benefit increases and the performance pool.

Whilst I'm delighted the Lions benefit (and even more delighted the Cowboys and Redskins take a hit), if I try and take the honolulu blue glasses off I have to say this seems harsh to me.

The owners collectively took the decision to enter an uncapped year with no CBA. They each had the opportunity to do what Dallas and Washington did. What they did was within the rules. Coming back afterwards and saying "that's not fair because I didn't do it too" seems a bit rough, to me.

March 13th, 2012, 7:23 am

aManNamedSuh

Heisman Winner

Joined: July 14th, 2005, 11:58 amPosts: 820

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

UK Lion wrote:

Whilst I'm delighted the Lions benefit (and even more delighted the Cowboys and Redskins take a hit), if I try and take the honolulu blue glasses off I have to say this seems harsh to me.

The owners collectively took the decision to enter an uncapped year with no CBA. They each had the opportunity to do what Dallas and Washington did. What they did was within the rules. Coming back afterwards and saying "that's not fair because I didn't do it too" seems a bit rough, to me.

The problem was because of that year they were going to get unfair advantages over the next several years on other teams, which is why it was so harsh. At least that's my take.

March 13th, 2012, 9:04 am

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 9645Location: Dallas

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

Seems a bit harsh to me, I man what does the term "uncapped" mean? Also, every contract must be league approved - so the league approved these contracts and is now punishing teams for something they themselves approved. In addition, they are putting out these punishments the same day as FA begins - nice notice NFL.

Whilst I'm delighted the Lions benefit (and even more delighted the Cowboys and Redskins take a hit), if I try and take the honolulu blue glasses off I have to say this seems harsh to me.

The owners collectively took the decision to enter an uncapped year with no CBA. They each had the opportunity to do what Dallas and Washington did. What they did was within the rules. Coming back afterwards and saying "that's not fair because I didn't do it too" seems a bit rough, to me.

The problem was because of that year they were going to get unfair advantages over the next several years on other teams, which is why it was so harsh. At least that's my take.

They were going to get an advantage this year - but was it unfair? To me, playing within the rules better than anyone else is the very definition of a fair advantage!

March 13th, 2012, 10:27 am

aManNamedSuh

Heisman Winner

Joined: July 14th, 2005, 11:58 amPosts: 820

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

I think if they would done a 1 year contracts for the uncapped year they wouldn't have been punished. The problem really was with taking advantage of "capped" years during an uncapped year. Not sure it needed to be so harsh, but I think it was a point being driven home more than anything.

March 13th, 2012, 10:35 am

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 9645Location: Dallas

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

aManNamedSuh wrote:

I think if they would done a 1 year contracts for the uncapped year they wouldn't have been punished. The problem really was with taking advantage of "capped" years during an uncapped year. Not sure it needed to be so harsh, but I think it was a point being driven home more than anything.

You generally make a point to change future behavior - make an example out of someone. Given that last year, with no CBA, was an exception - how does making an example of someone change future behavior when it no longer applies.

I want the Lions to take advatage of every rule, playing within the rules, to create a competitive advantage. They shouldn't be punished for that.

Now, if you can show me a rule either the Redskins or Cowboys violated, then that is a different story. But I haven't heard any mention of that.

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10136Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

My understanding is that the league warned Dallas and Washington about some of the deals they were making, but they ignored the warnings. The league approved the contracts, but one must wonder if the league had not approved the deals if those teams would have filed a lawsuit because of it.

I can see both sides to this story. What the Cowboys and Redskins did were within the legal guidelines, but only for that year. That being the case, why didn't they just give these guys one year deals worth an exhorbitant amount of money, rather than multi-year deals with an extreme amount of front loading? And if the league warned them, why didn't they just risk a suit and nullify the deals? If the other teams knew that those two franchises were pulling that, why didn't those teams do the same?

I think there's more to this than meets the eye.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

March 13th, 2012, 10:56 am

Pablo

RIP Killer

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 amPosts: 9645Location: Dallas

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

m2karateman wrote:

I think there's more to this than meets the eye.

Then that is what we need to see because based on the facts I've heard I see no ground for the NFL to stand on.

m2k - I expect that a suit from the players would have been the main worry.

If the NFL agrees in a CBA with the players that there will be an uncapped year, but then operates in a manner that effectively makes it a capped year (by voiding transactions that would have infringed the cap had there been one) then it would have been breaching the terms of the CBA and potentially competition law (by operating a cartel). So I don't think voiding things at the time was an option.

I guess the league may have been giving team informal warnings along the lines of "we can't stop you from doing this now, given the current CBA position, but if a new CBA is put in place we will come back and sort this out". For similar reasons to the above, they wouldn't want to admit to having given that kind of warning even today.

March 13th, 2012, 11:45 am

thelomasbrowns

Pro Bowl Player

Joined: August 24th, 2010, 9:54 pmPosts: 2539

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

I remember this being a big topic during the uncapped year. Mayhew specifically said they would proceed with caution and act as if there was a cap. There was a tangible sense that some teams were gaming the system.

_________________Jim Caldwell, on whether Jim Harbaugh is stealing his thunder: "Me? I don't have any thunder."

March 13th, 2012, 12:38 pm

njroar

Player of the Year - Offense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 2908

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

We saw it as uncapped, but there was an invisible cap in place. And what Dallas and Washington did was go above and beyond everyone else in that year for Miles Austin's and Haynesworth's contracts. They were warned and it was approved, but it was part of the deal with the NFLPA this year to get to 120.6 on the cap that Dallas and Washington face punishment for it.

March 13th, 2012, 3:22 pm

kdsberman

Team MVP

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pmPosts: 3426Location: Saginaw, MI

Re: Washington & Dallas LOSE Cap Space! (Must Read)

Can someone explain to me what an "uncapped" year is? Doesnt every year have a cap? I know..rookie question.